Pet hate - being asked for a title

euronorris

missbiggles1 wrote: »

Why do we need another new title when we already have Ms.?

Because so many on here didn't seem to like that either.


I imagine because it often infers that one is divorced, which may not be the case at all.


And that wasn't the only option I gave. The alternative is that other options are provided for men. Maybe there's a third alternative I haven't thought of?


Either way, I don't think it's something you'll ever be able to make everyone happy with.


I tend to say, or address ladies in letters as Ms, unless I have been told otherwise. I have no alternative until they tell me which title they prefer. It seems that some find that offensive. But I'm not about to start calling up every new client (or professional contact) we have and asking them to confirm what title they prefer before I correspond with them - the majority of them would think I was bonkers for even asking. It's not usually a problem anyway, as this information is usually confirmed during the initial client meeting.


But still, I would think that it's a reasonable assumption to make during initial correspondence and if they prefer another title, then they can tell me and I'll happily update our systems and ensure they are referred to in that way in the future.


If you'd already corrected someone and they continued to get it wrong, then yeah, it'd be annoying. But in the initial instance, I don't think that any offence is meant - they're just isn't another alternative to call them by.

moneyistooshorttomention

Imo - we should offer literally every single title we know of as an option when it comes to it and a "dont have a title" option.

That way we show up people who insist on a title of some description. Be it "Mrs/Miss" or "Lady/Sir" or "Dr" (when they arent a medical doctor), etc, etc.

With this - imo the practice of using titles would die out gradually - as it became clear to those who wish to use a title of any description that its regarded in exactly the same light as a "first name" or a "surname".

Not quite sure what to do about the modern practice of amalgamating two peoples surnames and double-barrelling it when they become a couple. I understand what they are getting at - but find it blimmin' ridiculous when they clearly havent come from a "double-barrelled" background and do wonder what on earth would happen if they have children as to what the surname would be. I've come across another instance of that today and there just is no more infallible marker of having come from a "working class background" imo than a double-barrelled surname being given for someone that clearly aint "posh" by any defition.:rotfl:

Person_one

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

That way we show up people who insist on a title of some description. Be it "Mrs/Miss" or "Lady/Sir" or "Dr" (when they arent a medical doctor), etc, etc.

:rotfl:

Why does that bother you so much? Does one of your 'neighbours from hell' use it?

moneyistooshorttomention

Irrelevant to thread. Does sound a bit like a "personal criticism"? - ie naughty.....

....and...nope....none of my two NFH households are remotely qualified enough to start claiming titles of any description...:rotfl:

missbiggles1

euronorris wrote: »

Because so many on here didn't seem to like that either.


I imagine because it often infers that one is divorced, which may not be the case at all.


And that wasn't the only option I gave. The alternative is that other options are provided for men. Maybe there's a third alternative I haven't thought of?


Either way, I don't think it's something you'll ever be able to make everyone happy with.


I tend to say, or address ladies in letters as Ms, unless I have been told otherwise. I have no alternative until they tell me which title they prefer. It seems that some find that offensive. But I'm not about to start calling up every new client (or professional contact) we have and asking them to confirm what title they prefer before I correspond with them - the majority of them would think I was bonkers for even asking. It's not usually a problem anyway, as this information is usually confirmed during the initial client meeting.


But still, I would think that it's a reasonable assumption to make during initial correspondence and if they prefer another title, then they can tell me and I'll happily update our systems and ensure they are referred to in that way in the future.


If you'd already corrected someone and they continued to get it wrong, then yeah, it'd be annoying. But in the initial instance, I don't think that any offence is meant - they're just isn't another alternative to call them by.

I doubt they'd like anything else any better because some woman, strangely, like to wear a label proclaiming their marital status and don't want to give that up.

NBLondon

I'd say... If somebody has a PhD and uses the title in their professional life (e.g. on their business correspondence) that's reasonable. Somebody who insists on it from a retailer or on their club membership card is possibly a bit up themselves. I've worked in academia and the people who have two doctorates and a professorship are quite likely to say "Call me Jack".

missbiggles1

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Imo - we should offer literally every single title we know of as an option when it comes to it and a "dont have a title" option.

That way we show up people who insist on a title of some description. Be it "Mrs/Miss" or "Lady/Sir" or "Dr" (when they arent a medical doctor), etc, etc.

With this - imo the practice of using titles would die out gradually - as it became clear to those who wish to use a title of any description that its regarded in exactly the same light as a "first name" or a "surname".

Not quite sure what to do about the modern practice of amalgamating two peoples surnames and double-barrelling it when they become a couple. I understand what they are getting at - but find it blimmin' ridiculous when they clearly havent come from a "double-barrelled" background and do wonder what on earth would happen if they have children as to what the surname would be. I've come across another instance of that today and there just is no more infallible marker of having come from a "working class background" imo than a double-barrelled surname being given for someone that clearly aint "posh" by any defition.:rotfl:

You really do have some strange ideas and hang ups, don't you?

Torry_Quine

missbiggles1 wrote: »

I doubt they'd like anything else any better because some woman, strangely, like to wear a label proclaiming their marital status and don't want to give that up.

It may seem strange to you but not to me. As I took my husband's name on marriage it is to me the natural thing to be Mrs X. LIke others Ms has connotations which may not be true but perception is what matters.

Mojisola

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Not quite sure what to do about the modern practice of amalgamating two peoples surnames and double-barrelling it when they become a couple.

I understand what they are getting at - but find it blimmin' ridiculous when they clearly havent come from a "double-barrelled" background and do wonder what on earth would happen if they have children as to what the surname would be.

I don't think couples do it because they are trying to sound 'posh'.

The countries where combining names on marriage is the norm manage fine. The children sometimes take the father's family name or the sons take the father's name and the daughters take the mother's name.

I can't think of any country where the children traditionally all take the mother's name.

Georgiegirl256

missbiggles1 wrote: »

I doubt they'd like anything else any better because some woman, strangely, like to wear a label proclaiming their marital status and don't want to give that up.

I just don't like he sound of Ms, I think it sounds daft.